Hey there Andy how you doing?
The thread you are referring to is called "Ron Paul: Don't cut NPR GTFO of Afghanistan" and was posted by the biggest Ron Paul supporter on T Nation John and it was on 3-17-11.
You might be taking about the following posts:
Please don't walk around thinking that Paul could beat Obama. You have contributed much to this forum of substance. None of it has anything to do with Ron Paul. When it comes to Paul you have a very large blind spot. If Paul were fortunate enough to win the republican nomination (which he WILL NOT) he would get beaten so badly by Obama it would make the Reagan/ Mondale election look like a squeaker.
One more time:
1-Too old and tends to sound like he's whining.
2-He is the anti-charisma candidate. People with zero charisma look at him and say "At least I have more charisma than Ron Paul."
3-Too radical (to pull the middle)
4-Congressmen don't get elected President(maybe it happened once 100 years ago).
5-The MSL media would beat him up so bad in comparison it would look like they were just playing around with Sarah Palin.
You really have to give up this idea that Paul is ever going to get elected to anything other than the seat he currently holds in the House. Just walk away man. I know you believe in the things that he espouses but find another candidate who actually has at least a ghost of a chance.
First of all John, you're either not paying attention to my posts, or you must have some sort of counter which you have not posted. As I've pointed out to you time and again it doesn't matter who the best debater is. I even gave you the Kennedy/Nixon example. But none of this means a thing to you. All you see is Ron Paul being the best debater and a sage when it comes to debate and mastering the issues. A national election is so much more than this, as I've explained already.
I guess I'll just have to say it one last time and then I won't come back. Ron Paul is NOT going to be elected President because he's an old man who sounds like he's whining. He has a lack of charisma that is unequalled in American politics at this level. It doesn't matter how much he knows about the economy, or that he is a strict constitutionalist (as if the average voter cares about that one). All that will matter is that he will be standing next to Mitt Romney or, anyone else (pick any other viable candidate) and he looks bad. End of story. I know you don't want to think that people are that shallow but as I've already explained and poll after poll every four years tells us, most people don't start paying attention to the Presidential election until about 30-60 days away from the election. And when they do they mostly vote their emotion. You are a rare breed John especially for your age, and I admire you for that. But most people especailly the ones who start paying attention 30-60 days out don't understand the issues and they vote on emotion.
Now unless you have some facts which prove me wrong I suggest you lighten up with the Ron Paul rhetoric it's only making you look bad. And keep in mind that I am not enjoying these little reminders to you. I wish that you were correct. While I don't fully agree with everything that Paul stands for he is so much better than Obama I'd trip over myself getting to the voting booth to vote for him, but that choice will NEVER come.
Your spiteful move to vote for Obama is immature and beneath your intelligence level. After Paul is defeated why not pick the best candidate who is left and vote for him? Do you think I liked voting for McCain in 08'? Nope. But he was absolutely head and shoulders better than the inexperienced lefty we now have.